Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

I have an idea of invention


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1    FlyingAngel

FlyingAngel

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,351 posts
  • Joined:29 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 April 2013 - 06:25 PM

It's a stun/paralyzer gun combining with AI (artificial intelligence). The gun has a camera, inside the camera is a computer chip which has the ability to analyze the movement of the target. So when the user shoot, the chip will try to auto-aim the target by moving the head of the gun around and shoot.

If every cops have this gun, catching a criminal isn't a big deal.


#2    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,588 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 20 April 2013 - 06:31 PM

How would it work in a crowd?


#3    shrooma

shrooma

    .goddamn sexual tyrannosaur.

  • Member
  • 2,977 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 20 April 2013 - 07:12 PM

a computer large enough to run an algorithm that could successfully predict movement to the extent that it could be used in a firearm would fill a room, and certainly wouldn't be small enough to fit in your hand.
not to mention the ethical implications behind a weapon that can autonomously kill people. if it missed, killing someone in front of/behind/at the side of the target, who'd be responsible for the death, the marksman? the software engineer?
the inventor.....?

sometimes, your signature is worth nothing at all.
.

#4    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 7,777 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 20 April 2013 - 07:18 PM

View PostFlyingAngel, on 20 April 2013 - 06:25 PM, said:

It's a stun/paralyzer gun combining with AI (artificial intelligence). The gun has a camera, inside the camera is a computer chip which has the ability to analyze the movement of the target. So when the user shoot, the chip will try to auto-aim the target by moving the head of the gun around and shoot.

If every cops have this gun, catching a criminal isn't a big deal.
Arnt they already testing this?


#5    sepulchrave

sepulchrave

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,745 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 April 2013 - 07:18 PM

Something along those lines (and perhaps more sinister) already exists, see the story at Ars Technica.


#6    shrooma

shrooma

    .goddamn sexual tyrannosaur.

  • Member
  • 2,977 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 20 April 2013 - 07:41 PM

View Postsepulchrave, on 20 April 2013 - 07:18 PM, said:

Something along those lines (and perhaps more sinister) already exists, see the story at Ars Technica.
.
what you have there sep, is a sight adjuster that allows for distance (i.e bullet drop due to gravity) and windspeed. the gun itself has to be lined, sighted, and fired by the marksman. i think the OP is suggesting a gun that can be vaguely pointed in the direction of a moving target, and the gun itself 'moves around' (??), predicts where the target will be, and fires accordingly.
i think?

sometimes, your signature is worth nothing at all.
.

#7    Calle

Calle

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 63 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sweden

  • Everyone but few seeks Perfection, the few that does not seek it knows that perfection is impossible, because perfection is unachievable

Posted 20 April 2013 - 08:54 PM

View Postshrooma, on 20 April 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

a computer large enough to run an algorithm that could successfully predict movement to the extent that it could be used in a firearm would fill a room, and certainly wouldn't be small enough to fit in your hand.
not to mention the ethical implications behind a weapon that can autonomously kill people. if it missed, killing someone in front of/behind/at the side of the target, who'd be responsible for the death, the marksman? the software engineer?
the inventor.....?

i would probably suggest an Wireless transmission, and the bullets always can go to someone else, even if their projectile
better have a computer to Aim when your lying in the ground wounded hand half uncounchess than shoot ramdomly


#8    FlyingAngel

FlyingAngel

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,351 posts
  • Joined:29 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 April 2013 - 12:23 AM

View PostRlyeh, on 20 April 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

How would it work in a crowd?
Is not supposed to work in a crowd. Even with a real gun, no cop dare to shoot, there is not reason why this one should.


View Postshrooma, on 20 April 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

a computer large enough to run an algorithm that could successfully predict movement to the extent that it could be used in a firearm would fill a room, and certainly wouldn't be small enough to fit in your hand.
not to mention the ethical implications behind a weapon that can autonomously kill people. if it missed, killing someone in front of/behind/at the side of the target, who'd be responsible for the death, the marksman? the software engineer?
the inventor.....?
No need a large computer. Small chips, engines like iPad/iPhone has already enough strength to analyze an image capture from camera.
Is not supposed to kill people: it's a stun/paralyzer gun.


#9    shrooma

shrooma

    .goddamn sexual tyrannosaur.

  • Member
  • 2,977 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 21 April 2013 - 07:09 AM

View PostFlyingAngel, on 21 April 2013 - 12:23 AM, said:






No need a large computer. Small chips, engines like iPad/iPhone has already enough strength to analyze an image capture from camera.

.
what you are suggesting, is a programme sophisticated enough to PREDICT MOVEMENT, i.e, where a moving target WILL BE, not just analysing an image, and aren't fully aware of just how much computation that would entail. it's something that the most powerful supercomputer wouldn't be able to handle to the extent that it could predict the completely unknown movement of a human randomly dodging, and certainly nothing that anyone could safely allow to use a firearm.
i wouldn't be applying for that patent JUST yet if i were you.....

Edited by shrooma, 21 April 2013 - 07:13 AM.

sometimes, your signature is worth nothing at all.
.

#10    FlyingAngel

FlyingAngel

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,351 posts
  • Joined:29 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 April 2013 - 12:24 PM

View Postshrooma, on 21 April 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

.
what you are suggesting, is a programme sophisticated enough to PREDICT MOVEMENT, i.e, where a moving target WILL BE, not just analysing an image, and aren't fully aware of just how much computation that would entail. it's something that the most powerful supercomputer wouldn't be able to handle to the extent that it could predict the completely unknown movement of a human randomly dodging, and certainly nothing that anyone could safely allow to use a firearm.
i wouldn't be applying for that patent JUST yet if i were you.....
No really need a super computer, really. Watch this:
It is able to locate where the target is. So if it can record the location of the marked dot at time t=0, then t=1, then predict t=2 is not a big deal. Except the hands and feet have unknown movement, the overall movement is a straight line. When a criminal run, he runs straight, not in a zic-zac movement like Neo in the Matrix...
This is not a firearm. It's a stun gun, you are paralyzed for a couple of second... so nothing dangerous.


#11    shrooma

shrooma

    .goddamn sexual tyrannosaur.

  • Member
  • 2,977 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 21 April 2013 - 12:54 PM

View PostFlyingAngel, on 21 April 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:


No really need a super computer, really. Watch this:
It is able to locate where the target is. So if it can record the location of the marked dot at time t=0, then t=1, then predict t=2 is not a big deal. Except the hands and feet have unknown movement, the overall movement is a straight line. When a criminal run, he runs straight, not in a zic-zac movement like Neo in the Matrix...
This is not a firearm. It's a stun gun, you are paralyzed for a couple of second... so nothing dangerous.
.
1) t=0  t=1  t=2 makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. t, as an integer merely means 'time', so 'time=0, time=1, time=2 has no meaning.
2) when someone is shooting at you, you take evasive action, you do NOT run in an easily predictable straight line.
3) ANY weapon that fires a projectile is a firearm whether it's lethal or non-lethal, the clue is in the name, an armament that can be fired, get it?
4) it's obvious you have an extremely closed mind which can't grasp the ideas it's trying to formulate, and therefore can't reasonably be expected to be part of a discussion.
5) i have better things to do than run around in circles with someone who can't understand a flawed premise. (see (4))

Edited by shrooma, 21 April 2013 - 01:05 PM.

sometimes, your signature is worth nothing at all.
.

#12    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,313 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 21 April 2013 - 01:07 PM

View PostFlyingAngel, on 21 April 2013 - 12:23 AM, said:

Is not supposed to work in a crowd.



if the criminals took the same stance then there should not be a problem, but history tells us otherwise, not all criminals are that obliging.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#13    FlyingAngel

FlyingAngel

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,351 posts
  • Joined:29 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 April 2013 - 10:01 PM

View Postshrooma, on 21 April 2013 - 12:54 PM, said:

.
1) t=0  t=1  t=2 makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. t, as an integer merely means 'time', so 'time=0, time=1, time=2 has no meaning.
No meaning for you. But for mathematician it's an interval of time. t=0 usually means the initial moment. And in case you have no knowledge about imaging, a video is captured in frame. You can mark the location of the target which is translate in coordinate (pixel) inside the image. The target moves, 40ms later it has a different position. From that you can predict the next position 40ms later. People don't appear on top of the screen then instantly 40ms later appear at the bottom at the screen unless he moves at 100km/h.


2) when someone is shooting at you, you take evasive action, you do NOT run in an easily predictable straight line.
Yes. When someone is shooting only. When the cops don't shoot, you run. You don't just stay there and get caught. They shoot when you have a gun and is a threat only. You don't shoot a 16 years old running.


3) ANY weapon that fires a projectile is a firearm whether it's lethal or non-lethal, the clue is in the name, an armament that can be fired, get it?
Doesn't matter, if the cops can use a normal gun, then having an AI auto-aim is a plus. Lose nothing, gain everything.


4) it's obvious you have an extremely closed mind which can't grasp the ideas it's trying to formulate, and therefore can't reasonably be expected to be part of a discussion.
Closed mind is for people who don't have imagination, stay in the shell of actual life, have no creativity (like you)


5) i have better things to do than run around in circles with someone who can't understand a flawed premise. (see (4))
Then don't run around, no one forced you to. Very easy.


View Postfreetoroam, on 21 April 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

if the criminals took the same stance then there should not be a problem, but history tells us otherwise, not all criminals are that obliging.
The guns helps you to auto-aim. All you need is press the shoot trigger when he's alone. It doesn't help you in any way shoot him precisely in a crowd.

Edited by FlyingAngel, 22 April 2013 - 10:04 PM.


#14    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 7,777 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:29 PM

What about costs who will pay? where would you test it? market target? any disadcantages?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users